!"#$%%&"$'()"'*%&(+,-./0"#$12(3"'"0/4(5-0-&%6((!"#$%&'(&)*+"#+,#)-.#!',/.0#12#3'+&"#4+("0&)*+"56#!"#$%&'()!"#*+,-').',/"%"0)1/20/,&)7899:;:<8:=

!")-+">#?2#1*@@*&"+A#1-2B?/&0(&).#C.")./A#C*)>#D"*%./6*)>#+,#E.F#G+/H

I&"(&/>#8:A#:<8J

!!!

This report was made possible by funding provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Contributions to

the writing and interpretation of results by past or present Foundation employees were limited to

verifications of fact.

Contributors:

- Jeff Seaman (Babson College Survey Research Group)

- Christine Saieh (Graduate Center – City University of New York)

- Andrew Haiwen Chu (Graduate Center – City University of New York)

- Jennifer Stoops (Graduate Center – City University of New York)

- Kylah Torre (Graduate Center – City University of New York)

Table of Contents

Executive Summary -- ---------------------------------------------------------- i

I. Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------------1

II. The Early Years ---------------------------------------------------------------1

III. The Present Inquiry ----------------------------------------------------------7

IV. Quantitative Analysis -------------------------------------------------------- 9

V. Qualitative Analysis --------------------------------------------------------20

VI. Summary of Major Findings -----------------------------------------------29

Appendices ------------------------------------------------------------------------32

References ------------------------------------------------------------------------47

!!!

i

Executive Summary

In 1992, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation established the Learning Outside the Classroom Program. The

name was changed soon after to the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program, the purpose of which was to

explore educational alternatives for people who wanted to pursue higher education but who could not

easily attend regularly scheduled college classes. This exploration resulted in a promulgation of a major

development in pedagogical practice commonly referred to as the asynchronous learning network or

ALN. Using modern data communications technology, including the Internet and World Wide Web,

ALNs allow teaching and learning to transcend time and space in order to provide access to a quality

higher education. Twenty years later, ALN evolved into online learning to become a basic aspect of

American higher education. (Allen & Seaman, 2013)

In June 2009, a project was conceived to examine and evaluate the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program.

The purpose of this project was twofold: first, to analyze the role of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning

Program in nurturing online learning enabling it to evolve into a major vehicle for providing higher

education opportunities to millions of students; and second, to examine the historical record and to begin

the process of documenting and preserving the stories of the individuals, colleges, universities and

organizations that were critical players in the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program. This report

documents the processes, findings and conclusions of this project.

It is the opinion of these researchers that the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation had an important role in fueling

the development of online learning in American higher education via its Anytime, Anyplace Learning

Program. The Foundation’s timing was critical by beginning this program just before the Internet was

evolving as a major technological breakthrough. Starting in 1992, the Foundation funded 346 projects

totaling $72 million, most of which were made to non-profit colleges and universities. Major distance

and adult learning providers such as the University of Maryland University College and the Penn State

World Campus were early grantees. Following on the heels of these institutions, large mainstream public

university systems such as the University of Illinois, the State University of New York, the University of

Massachusetts, and the University of Central Florida developed substantial online learning programs. In

!!!

ii

the early 2000s, large urban universities in New York, Chicago and Milwaukee were funded to develop

and expand blended learning environments. Perhaps the most significant initiative of the grant program

was the establishment of the Sloan Consortium of Colleges and Universities (Sloan-C). Originally an

informal organization of Foundation grantees, the Consortium incorporated in 2008 as a non-profit, 501

(c) (3) organization. Sloan-C became the largest recipient of funding from the Anytime, Anyplace,

Learning Program, receiving in excess of $15 million over the course of the grant program.

Summary of Findings

First, the public sector of higher education was integral to the success of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning

Program. The vast majority of the grants awarded as part of this program went to large public university

systems including community colleges. This was not an accident but by design.

Second, most individuals from institutions that have major online learning programs who were not

Anytime, Anyplace, Learning Program grantees (public, private non-profit, private for-profit) , are not

aware of the contribution of the Foundation. The awareness among this group that does exist comes more

from their involvement with the Sloan Consortium.

Third, among individuals in private, for-profit institutions, awareness of the Foundation’s contribution to

online learning is modest at best and somewhat lower than for other non-grantee institutions. And again,

the awareness that does exist comes from their association with the Sloan Consortium.

Fourth, the Sloan Consortium has made its presence known to the majority of all major online learning

providers regardless of whether they are public, private, non-profit or for-profit. It is likely that the

legacy of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program rests with the success of the Consortium.

In sum, a mix of online technology and pedagogical practice is rapidly reshaping instruction in our

colleges and universities. The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation was at the forefront of and served as a catalyst

for this movement. It will continue to grow for years to come.

"!!

I. Introduction

In 1992, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation established the Learning Outside the Classroom Program. The

name was changed soon after to the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program, the purpose of which was to

explore educational alternatives for people who wanted to pursue higher education but who could not

easily attend regularly scheduled college classes. This exploration resulted in a promulgation of a major

development in pedagogical practice commonly referred to as the asynchronous learning network or

ALN1. Using modern data communications technology, including the Internet and World Wide Web,

ALNs allow teaching and learning to transcend time and space in order to provide access to a quality

higher education. Twenty years later, online learning and its offshoot blended learning have become a

basic aspect of American higher education. (Allen & Seaman, 2013)

In June 2009, a project was conceived to examine and evaluate the Sloan Foundation’s Anytime,

Anyplace Learning Program. The purpose of this project was twofold: first, to analyze the role of the

Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program in nurturing online learning enabling it to evolve into a major

vehicle for providing higher education opportunities to millions of students; and second, to examine the

historical record and to begin the process of documenting and preserving the stories of the individuals,

colleges, universities and organizations that were critical players in the Anytime, Anyplace Learning

Program. This report documents the processes, findings and conclusions of this project.

II. The Early Years: Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Online Learning and American Higher

Education

The concept of digital learning predates the Internet and the World Wide Web by decades. Instructional

software packages designed to be used on large mainframe computers and distributed via digital

communications technology have been in existence since the 1960s. Computer-assisted instructional

programs (CAI) using software such as PLATO developed at the University of Illinois at Urbana-

Champaign, were developed and delivered over closed or private networks. Because publically-available

digital communications were in their infancy, students were expected to go to a school’s computer

laboratory to use these programs which significantly limited their utilization. Furthermore, these software

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 The Foundation chose the ALN acronym to indicate that its grant program would favor asynchronous access to education, that a normal class format would be favored, with a faculty member leading the class (asynchronously), over a network that is both a computer network (the Internet) and a learning network across which learners and faculty interact, examining ideas and problems relevant to the discipline. The Foundation specifically did not include under the ALN definition, self-learning for individuals using web- or other computer resources with little student to student or student to faculty interaction, or the development of expensive learning media. Today, the majority of all credit-bearing courses offered over the Internet follow the Sloan-favored ALN format.

#!!

packages followed a programmed instruction, CAI model that allowed for little if any student to faculty

interaction. In the 1980s, Roxanne Hiltz and Murray Turoff at the New Jersey Institute of Technology

started experimenting with virtual learning that went beyond programmed instruction and allowed for a

modest level of interactivity among students and faculty. These virtual systems planted the seeds for one

of the most significant developments in delivering instruction in the 20th century into what many referred

to initially as the asynchronous learning network (ALN) and later as online learning.

Ralph Gomory, President of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, promoted the ALN concept in the early

1990s by establishing the Learning Outside the Classroom Program/Anytime, Anyplace Learning

Program from which the first grants were awarded in 1992. His vision was that students could learn in

their homes, places of business or just about anywhere they could connect to a digital network. Joel

Hartman, Vice Provost for Information Technologies and Resources at the University of Central Florida,

in an interview commented that “Dr. Ralph Gomory and the Foundation were way ahead of their time in

promoting digital teaching and learning especially considering that the Internet as we know it did not

exist.” The vast majority of households in the United States did not have connections to digital networks

and no one was predicting that within a decade the populace would be willing to pay for high-speed

communications lines to use the vast information resources of the Internet including access to online

courses and degrees.

The grants during the early 1990s were mostly for experimentation and proof of concept. Major grants

were made to a variety of institutions including:

Stanford University (Patrick Suppes)

Drexel University (Steve Andriole)

Cornell University (Kurt Gottfried)

New York University (Richard Vigilante)

State University of New York (Richard Dressner)

North Virginia Community College (Randal Lemke)

Burks Oakley, at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), received one of the early grants

from the Sloan Foundation in October 1993 and taught his first class using ALN technologies in January

1994. There were no online courses or programs offered by UIUC at that time. The Graduate School of

Library and Information Science at UIUC began an online master’s degree in Library and Information

Science in July 1996 - that was really the first online program for the Urbana campus. In 1995, UIUC

received a major grant from the Sloan Foundation to establish the Sloan Center for Asynchronous

Learning Environments (SCALE), and this led to faculty across the campus integrating ALN approaches

$!!

into their on-campus courses. Much of this work concentrated on developing online modules that could

be integrated into traditional face-to-face courses. Oakley concluded that “the visibility of SCALE led to

Sloan-funded online programs on the three campuses of the University of Illinois and eventually

influenced online development throughout the state.”

Gary Miller, former Executive Director of the Penn State World Campus, commented that Penn State

had a long history of offering for-credit courses and programs at a distance, but the focus was on

correspondence study (undergraduate courses and a small number of degree programs) and video

teleconferencing (graduate certificates and degrees delivered to other campuses or to industry sites via

satellite or interactive video). In 1993, the Sloan Foundation funded the first two experiments with off-

campus online programs—a test preparation course for the professional engineering examination, which

combined online and video components, and an online version of a post-baccalaureate certificate in

Acoustics Engineering, which previously had been delivered via satellite. Dr. Miller commented that the

Foundation provided grants that allowed us to achieve scale and were essential to our ability to launch the

World Campus. These grants signaled to the University community that the World Campus was, indeed,

a University-wide commitment supported by a major Foundation—that we were leading a change

movement as a University and that individual academic units would not be asked to assume the financial

risk of innovation. Without Sloan Foundation support, “we may well have launched some online

programs, but we would not have been able to achieve the diversity and scale that the World Campus

achieved in a relatively short period of time.”

Jacquie Moloney, formerly the Dean of Continuing Studies, Corporate and Online Education, and now

a Vice Chancellor at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell, initiated online programs in 1996, and

received three grants from the Foundation. In an interview, she stated that:

“UMass Lowell was the forerunner in the UMass system and in the public system in

Massachusetts, numerous other campuses were encouraged by our work and built programs as a

result. UMass Lowell launched its online program in 1996, the system followed with

UMassOnline in 2001.

The Sloan grants that UMass Lowell received encouraged us to serve as leaders and enablers of

online education in numerous ways. We were engaged often by other institutions to do faculty

development and to provide strategies for engaging faculty in online education.

%!!

I believe it is fair to say that the grants that the Sloan Foundation provided not only transformed

UMass Lowell, but propelled us into a leadership that resulted in the growth on online programs

throughout the New England region.”

The development of commercial access to the Internet and the World Wide Web in the mid-1990s

moved the ALN concept into widespread application as people readily bought modem-equipped personal

microcomputers and contracted with ISPs to connect into the new communications technology. Although

initially mostly text-based and reliant on slow-speed and dial-up communications, institutions especially

those engaged in providing distance learning programs began to offer ALN options. Many of these early

programs used technology that was not designed for teaching and learning. Faculty pioneers in online

learning used various creative approaches to fit course material and instruction into available

technologies. Course and learning management systems and other Web-based learning software were

non-existent or in their infancy. In addition to colleges and universities, other organizations such as

educational consortia, corporations and government agencies adopted the idea of asynchronous learning

and started to develop and offer educational opportunities over the Internet. ALN remained popular as

the acronym for the new learning modality but other names such as “online learning”, “e-learning” and

“virtual learning” evolved and gained broad acceptance. Following on the heels of the unprecedented

popularity of the Internet in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the acceptance of online learning evolved into

a viable instructional modality.

In 1997, the U.S. Department of Education released a report that indicated twenty-two percent of

American colleges and universities were offering some form of “distance learning” using online

environments. (U.S. DOE, 1997) Most of these institutions had long histories of providing distance

learning programs in other delivery formats such as television, video cassettes, and printed course lab

packs to geographically-dispersed students. It needs to be mentioned that the U.S. DOE had an irregular

cycle for collecting data on distance learning and in 2002, the Sloan Foundation wisely decided to initiate

and fund a yearly collection of data specific to online learning by awarding a grant to the Babson College

Survey Research Group headed by Elaine Allen and Jeff Seaman. The first report by Allen & Seaman

indicated that in the 2002-2003 academic year, eighty-one percent of all institutions of American higher

education were offering online learning and were enrolling in excess of 1.6 million students. Of these,

public institutions and the growing private for-profit colleges were leading the way. By 2012, almost

seven million students were enrolled in online courses in American colleges and universities. (Allen &

Seaman, 2013)

&!!

Perhaps the most startling aspect of the growth of online learning was the fact that it no longer was

viewed as an aspect of distance learning but that it had entered into the mainstream of higher education

providing access to a host of student populations. In addition to students physically living far away from

a college campus, students leading busy lives in urban areas appreciated the convenience of taking online

courses in their homes, students living in college dormitories enrolled in online courses because they

enjoyed learning with technology, and corporate trainers looked upon online learning as a less expensive

way to provide staff development to employees.

In the early 2000s, a number of online initiatives at several urban-based colleges and universities such

as the City University of New York, the University of Illinois – Chicago, and the University of

Wisconsin-Milwaukee evolved and spurred the move to blended learning environments. Enrollment data

on this population is difficult to come by mainly because definitions of “blended learning” are elusive and

confusing as institutions adopted “blended”, “hybrid’, “web-enhanced” and “web-supported” learning

into their course offerings. In addition, most institutions have been slow to systematically collect data on

this modality of learning. It is likely that there are several million students enrolled in blended learning

courses in higher education and speculation is that it is evolving into the dominant form of learning

throughout all higher education with most courses integrating some aspect of online learning activity.

The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation was one of the first organizations to see the importance of blended

learning and was one of the first grantors to fund development and other projects based on blended

learning concepts.

In sum, it is the opinion of these researchers that the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation had an important

role in fueling the development of online learning in American higher education via its Anytime, Anyplace

Learning Program. The Foundation’s timing was critical by beginning this program just before the

Internet was evolving as a major technological breakthrough. Starting in 1992, the Foundation funded

346 projects totaling $72 million, most of which were made to non-profit colleges and universities.

Major distance and adult learning providers such as the University of Maryland University College and

the Penn State World Campus were early grantees. Following on the heels of these institutions, large

mainstream public university systems such as the University of Illinois, the State University of New

York, the University of Massachusetts, and the University of Central Florida developed substantial online

learning programs. In the early 2000s, large urban universities in New York, Chicago and Milwaukee

were funded to develop and expand blended learning environments. Perhaps the most significant

initiative of the grant program was the establishment of the Sloan Consortium of Colleges and

Universities (Sloan-C). Originally an informal organization of Foundation grantees, the Consortium

'!!

incorporated in 2008 as a non-profit, 501 (c) (3) organization. Sloan-C became the largest recipient of

funding from the Anytime, Anyplace, Learning Program, receiving in excess of $15 million over the

course of the grant program. Sloan-C has evolved into “an institutional and professional leadership

organization dedicated to integrating online education into the mainstream of higher education, helping

institutions and individual educators improve the quality, scale, and breadth of online education.” It

provides a full range of member services including annual conferences, professional development

webinars, publishing the Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, and sponsoring research

initiatives. Its annual surveys of online learning conducted by Allen & Seaman and funded by the

Foundation are referenced in almost every major report or study of online learning in the United States.

By 2012, the Consortium had approximately 400 institutional and 700 individual dues-paying members.

(!!

III. The Present Inquiry

It was anticipated that several themes would evolve to frame the inquiry. These themes included:

") The evolution of online learning in mainstream institutions of higher education including public

private, large university systems and community colleges.. The inquiry would specifically

examine how different types of higher education institutions benefitted from and were influenced

by their involvement in Sloan's Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program.

#) The importance of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program in helping to build a community of

scholars, administrators and policy makers interested in moving online learning forward.

Specifically, this theme would examine how this community eventually evolved into the original

`Sloan Consortium, an informal group with an Advisory Board appointed by the Foundation, and

then into the formally incorporated 501(c)3 Sloan-Consortium in 2008. The incorporation of the

Consortium was initiated by the Sloan Foundation in order to move it into a self-sustaining

operation. The evolution of the Sloan Consortium and its contribution to the success of online

learning as a fundamental mode of delivering instruction would be examined as a pivotal element

of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program. The Sloan Consortium originated from the

community-building effort described above and its contribution is important not only historically

but as critical to the future of quality online learning in American higher education.

$) Many long-term funded programs with a strategic focus, as the Foundation’s ALN program was,

move forward by creating special projects and/or events that are prompted by unexpected

opportunity; these might require exceptional speed and agility, special deployment of temporary

ad hoc organizations, and deployment of resources, but they can play a unique role in moving the

strategic program forward. Specific examples of such projects of opportunity within the Anytime,

Anyplace Program included the implementation of the Sloan Semester for students displaced

from their institutions by hurricane Katrina and the efforts spent to support the US federal

government in mounting its e-Army U project. In addition, conferences and workshops that

started as small information sharing activities have emerged into annual well-attended national

events.

The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation funded this evaluation project over three years starting in August

2009. Phase I of this project (2009-2010) concentrated on examining historical documents and on

interviewing a sample of major grantees of the early period of the program (1990s). During this phase,

*!!

the researchers set out to look for evidence that shed light on the themes. However they also anticipated

that, as data were analyzed, other themes possibly related to “lessons learned” would emerge.

In 2011 and 2012, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation funded Phase II of this project. Phase II extended

the process of developing a comprehensive picture of the role of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning

Program and it allowed the researchers to probe more broadly into issues that emerged in Phase I. This

project represented a unique opportunity to report comprehensively on the collaboration between

American higher education and a prestigious foundation in forging and developing a significant

alternative to traditional classroom instruction.

+!!

IV. Quantitative Analyses

A. Establishing Databases and Surveying the Field

A major task for this project was to develop an accurate record of the grants and awards made as part of

the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program. To do so, a database was established that summarized 346

grants awarded totaling $72,197,965. that represented the entire universe of grantees of the Anytime,

Anyplace Learning Program. These grants were awarded to institutions represented by 190 individuals

(principal investigators). Entries for this database dated as far back as 1992. An attempt was made by

email and telephone to contact as many of these individuals as possible to verify contact information. In

reviewing the grants for the 190 individuals, there were a number of multiple grants awarded to the same

recipients. For example, John Bourne was the principal investigator for twenty-eight different grants for

three different institutions (Vanderbilt University, Olin College and The Sloan Consortium). In addition

some of the individuals were deceased, some had serious health issues, some had resigned or retired and

no email addresses were available. Some of these individuals represented organizations not

colleges/universities. Some individuals who received very small grants for travel and modest research

projects remained in the database but were excluded from any follow-up. As a result, the 190 individuals

were reduced to 129 identified as representing the pool of grant recipients who would be contacted to

participate in this study.

The second major task was to design and field test a survey (see Appendix A) that would seek to

collect opinions from the grant recipients as to the importance and impact of the Anytime, Anyplace

Learning Program grants to them, to their institutions, higher education and the general development of

online learning. Jeff Seaman, of the Babson Survey Research Group, assisted and supervised this aspect

of the study. The survey was designed and tested in June and July 2011, and the first mailings to these

129 individuals were sent out. Four follow-up mailings were conducted. By the end of August, 88

individuals (N=88) responded for a 68.2 % response rate. The 88 respondents represented:

248 of the total (346) grants awarded (71.7%)

$56,060,152 of the total dollars awarded of $72,197,965 (77.6%)

95 of 143 of the total number of institutions awarded grants (66.4%)

The above response rates were deemed sufficient enough to conduct an analysis. It needs to be mentioned

that after the beginning of this study, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation awarded five additional Anytime,

",!!

Anyplace Learning Program grants totaling $340,000. These grants were not included in the sample.

However, three of the five principal investigators of these grants by virtue of having received earlier

Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program grants were in the original sample of grantees surveyed.

The third major task reflected a need to provide a comparison of the opinions of grantees to the larger

universe of American colleges and universities, a decision was made to survey major online learning

providers who were not Foundation grantees. A database of leading online learning providers was created

using a variety of sources. U.S. News and World Report develops an annual list of leading online college

and university programs. This list for 2010 was used to initialize the database. This list was reviewed

and all Sloan Foundation grant recipients were eliminated resulting in a total of 102 database entries. The

U.S. News and World Report list did not include any for-profit colleges or universities. However, for-

profit online learning providers represented a significant subset of all online learning in American higher

education. An attempt was made to add for-profit online providers to the database. No attempt was made

to select the “best” of these colleges and instead entries were based on size of program as collected by

reviews of websites. As a result, an additional 88 for-profit online learning institutions were added to this

database for a total 190. A survey (see Appendix B) modified and streamlined from the instrument used

for Sloan Foundation grantees was designed and tested in January 2012, and the first mailings to these

190 individuals were sent out in February. Four follow-up mailings were conducted. By the end of May

2012, 108 individuals (N=108) responded for a 56.8 % response rate. These 108 responses represent:

87 non-profit online learning providers and

21 for-profit online learning providers.

It should be mentioned that the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program did not fund any for-profit higher

education institutions.

B. Results of the Survey of Foundation Grantees

Table 1 provides a frequency distribution summarizing the responses to the question: “What level of

impact did the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation grant activity have on the success of online learning in the

respondent’s institution?” The majority of respondents (66.7%) indicated the Foundation had a large

positive impact.

Table 2 provides a frequency distribution summarizing the responses to the question: “What level of

impact did the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation grant activity have on the growth of online learning in

""!!

general?” The majority of respondents (65.3%) indicated the Foundation had a large positive impact. In

sum, the results illustrated in Tables 1 and 2 indicated that these respondents view the Anytime, Anyplace

learning Program as having a positive impact on their institutions and on the growth of online learning in

general.

Table 1: The success of online learning at my institution

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid No impact 3 3.4 4.3 4.3

Small positive impact 20 22.7 29.0 33.3

Large positive impact 46 52.3 66.7 100.0

Total 69 78.4 100.0

Missing Missing 10 11.4 Does not apply 9 10.2

Total 19 21.6

Total 88 100.0

Table 2: The growth of online learning in general

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid No impact 6 6.8 8.3 8.3

Small positive impact 19 21.6 26.4 34.7

Large positive impact 47 53.4 65.3 100.0

Total 72 81.8 100.0

Missing Missing 10 11.4 Does not apply 6 6.8

Total 16 18.2

Total 88 100.0

Table 3 provides the percentages of “Yes’ responses to the question: “In what ways do you believe the

overall activities of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation impacted online learning in higher education?” The

results show that a substantive majorities of these respondents indicated that the Foundation impacted

online learning across higher education in many ways. By far the largest percentage (96.1%) was for

building a community for both formal and informal discussion of online learning issues. Essentially this

can be interpreted as reflecting the contributions of the Sloan Consortium.

"#!!

Following up on the role of the Sloan Consortium, Table 4 provides responses to the question: “What

role did each of the following play for your institution's efforts with online learning (including all aspects,

not just those funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation)?” The results in Table 4 show that a substantial

majority (78.1%) indicated that the Sloan Consortium played a significant role. EDUCAUSE with 40.0%

was next among the organizations in playing a significant role. Table 5 provides an overall summary of

the impact of the Sloan Consortium on individuals, institutions, higher education and the growth of online

learning in general.

Table 3: How did the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Impact Online Learning in American Higher Education?

Activity Percentage Responded Yes Built a community for both formal and informal discussion of online learning issues 96.1 Established major venues (e.g., conferences, workshops) focused on online learning 84.4 Funded and initiated major research projects for studying online learning 72.7 Provided publication venues for disseminating scholarship (e.g., studies, best practices). 74.0 Established quality standards and frameworks for online learning 77.9 Provided public awareness of online learning in the news media (local, regional, national 74.0 Provided print and web-based information resources on online learning 74.0 Provided social networking resources for the online learning community 55.8 Made consulting and other expertise available to institutions initiating online learning activities 62.3 Other 20.8

"$!!

Table 4: Professional Organizations – Impact on Online Learning

Percentage indicating

Professional Organization Moderate or Large Impact

American Distance Education Consortium (ADEC) 7.9%

American Society for Training and Development (ASTD) 4.8%

Assoc. for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) 0.0%

Association for the Advance of Computing in Education (AACE) 6.3%

Council for Adult and Continuing Education (CAEL) 10.9%

EDUCAUSE 40.0%

eLearning Guild 3.2%

European Distance Education Network (EDEN) 4.8%

International Society of Technology in Education (ISTE) 11.3%

Penn State American Center for the Study of Distance Education 7.9%

Sloan Consortium (Sloan-C) 78.1%

United States Distance Learning Association (USDLA) 19.1%

Western Cooperative for Educational Technologies (WCET) 25.4%

Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) 19.3%

Table 5: What was the Impact of the Sloan Consortium… (asked of Grantees)

Percentage Indicating Positive or Somewhat Positive For you 91.4

For your institution 82.8

For Higher Education 80.3

For the Growth of Online Learning 94.1

In addition to responses to specific questions, participants were free to make open-ended comments

about various aspects of their experiences with the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program and Sloan-C.

Starting with the grantees, below is a representative sample of comments about their grant activities:

"%!!

“The original grant was very early, spring 1995, and in some sense was about whether the practices of the early pioneers on campus could be replicated more broadly. Much of the funding was allocated to internal grants for the local recipients to develop their own approach, which would vary a fair amount by discipline and size of course. We had some truly wonderful early grantees and they did some quite interesting work in Chemistry, the Life Sciences, Mathematics, Foreign Languages, and Economics. Invariably these early people, would get some recognition for their work, assume an administrative capacity as a consequence and be replaced in the teaching by other people who were diligent but less creative in their effort.” -Faculty Member from a Large Public Midwestern University “Have more faculty involvement at the stage of proposal development. There was widespread faculty support of blended, voiced during a campus-wide strategic planning process that pre-dated the grant. / / However, the Sloan grant proposal-writing process that took place over the summer, so the grant plan of work was decided by academic administrators along with academic technology staff. This led to political problems that slowed progress during the implementation process. Not insurmountable, but things would have gone more smoothly if faculty had a hand in proposal development. / / Another challenge had nothing to do with the grant. The project implementation began at the same time that the economy faltered. The institution was caught up in a traumatic process of budget cuts and layoffs, which led to staffing instability and morale problems that had an impact on the project. In retrospect, it is amazing what we were able to accomplish, given the turbulence of the time!” - Administrator from a Small Private New England College “I would not have changed anything. The grants were written in such a way that there was flexibility in using emerging practices and approaches in accomplishing the overall goals. / / Without these grants, U_____ would no longer exist. As a result of the grants, U____ is a thriving university even in this current recession. Year after year our online enrollments grow while the campus enrollments drop. If we did not have the online program, we would have 30% fewer students, 33% fewer credit hours offered and would have been converted from a university to a state office complex.” – Faculty Member from a Small Public Midwestern College “The grant allowed us to create our first four online courses, and Connecticut now has thousands of online enrollments per year. In addition, ____________ State College is now proudly branded as Connecticut's public online college. / / We could not have gotten here without seed money from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. / /” – President from a Medium Size New England Public College “Sloan supported the ________ Virtual University, of which I was CEO. The aim of the ______________VU was to coordinate and enhance access to online courses and programs in ___________. The program was really just underway when the __________ State University system decided to pull out. The loss of the biggest participant in the ________VU led to its immediate collapse. We returned what remained of the Sloan grant.” - CEO from a Western Large Public University System

"&!!

“The overall project concept was fine. However, there was a change in leadership at the university and in project directors such that support (symbolic and otherwise) from the top was not what it was when the grant activity started.” – Faculty Member from a Large East Coast Public University “We succeeded in fulfilling the primary aims of the grants, but the administration failed to support future grants that pushed the program to a system-wide level which would mean that a system-wide officer would have to take over the grant. If we had to do this again, I would have appealed to a higher authority (President of the University), rather than through my immediate superior, the Chancellor's office, which did not understand the Sloan initiatives fully when new persons took office in the higher administration. A system-wide approach was needed since no one campus could provide all of the distance learning courses (including hybrid courses) that would lead to a certificate or degree obtained through the University of _______ “ – Faculty Member from a Public University on the West Coast

The above sample of comments provided valuable insights into the nature of the grant activities as seen

through the eyes of individuals (i.e. principal investigators) who were most involved in the development

and implementation of ALN grants. The majority of the comments indicated that these grants were

positive experiences for the individuals and their institutions. However, they also identify issues and/or

concerns related to funding, change of personnel, and institutional leadership.

C. Results of the Survey of Non-Sloan Grantees

Table 6 provides a summary of the responses from non-grantees to the question: Are you familiar with

the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation’s Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program?” A majority (59.8%) of the

respondents were not familiar with the program. Table 7 follows up on this question by asking about the

“impact of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program on your institution”. The vast majority of these

respondents indicated the program had no impact, they did not know or just did not answer the question.

Table 8 indicates that similar responses were recorded when asking about the “impact of the Anytime,

Anyplace Learning Program on Online Learning in General in Higher Education”.

Table 6: Familiar with the Sloan Foundation’s Anytime, Anyplace

Learning Program

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

Yes 43 39.8 40.2 40.2

No 64 59.3 59.8 100.0

Total 107 99.1 100.0

Missing 0 1 .9

Total 108 100.0

"'!!

Table 7: Impact of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program on Your Institution

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

No Impact 21 19.4 24.4 24.4

Small Positive Impact

9 8.3 10.5 34.9

Large Positive Impact

12 11.1 14.0 48.8

Don't Know 44 40.7 51.2 100.0

Total 86 79.6 100.0

Missing 0 22 20.4

Total 108 100.0

Table 8: Impact of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program on Online Learning in General in Higher Education

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

No Impact 6 5.6 6.9 6.9

Small Positive Impact

11 10.2 12.6 19.5

Large Positive Impact

24 22.2 27.6 47.1

Don't Know 46 42.6 52.9 100.0

Total 87 80.6 100.0

Missing 0 21 19.4

Total 108 100.0

However, the views of the non-grantees change when asked about their opinions of the Sloan

Consortium. The Consortium was the largest recipient (more than $15 million) of grants from the

Anytime, Anyplace, Learning Program. Table 9 provides responses to the question: “Are you at all

familiar with Sloan-C?” The vast majority (85.6%) of these respondents were familiar with Sloan-C.

Table 10 indicates that a majority (66.7%) were members of Sloan-C. More telling is Table 11 which

indicates that the vast majority of these non-grantees indicated that Sloan-C had a somewhat or large

positive impact on them as individuals, on their institutions, on higher education, and on the growth of

"(!!

online learning in general. The conclusion here is that while these individuals were not familiar with or

did not have an opinion on the impact of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation’s Anytime, Anyplace Learning

Program, they were positive on the impact of the Program’s major funding initiative, the Sloan

Consortium.

Table 9: Familiar with Sloan-C

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

Yes 89 82.4 85.6 85.6

No 15 13.9 14.4 100.0

Total 104 96.3 100.0

Missing 0 4 3.7

Total 108 100.0

Table 10: Member of Sloan-C

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid

Yes 68 63.0 66.7 66.7

No 34 31.5 33.3 100.0

Total 102 94.4 100.0

Missing 0 6 5.6

Total 108 100.0

Table 11: What was the Impact of the Sloan Consortium… (asked of Non-Grantees)

Percentage Indicating Positive or Somewhat Positive For you 84.5

For your institution 76.4

For Higher Education 77.5

For the Growth of Online Learning 83.3

"*!!

It would be helpful to compare several of the populations from the results of the two surveys. First,

individuals representing institutions receiving Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program grants viewed

favorably (see Tables 1, 2, 3, 4,5 ) the contributions of the both the Foundation and Sloan-C. Both

organizations were important for them individually, their institutions, higher education and the general

development of online learning. For non-grantees the responses tell a different story. While supportive

of the Sloan-C and its activities (see Tables, 9,10,11), the non-grantees saw much less impact (see Tables

7 and 8) or did not have an opinion of the Foundation and its Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program.

Their association of online learning with the Sloan name is based on interactions with the Consortium not

the Foundation.

Second, within the non-grantee populations, the respondents represent two different types of

institutions: non-profit (public or private) and for-profit colleges and universities. It might be helpful to

compare them separately with regard to their opinions of Sloan-C. Table 12 combines the data in Tables

5 (Grantees) and 11(Non-Grantees); and breaks down the non-grantees into non-profit (public or private)

and for-profit institutions. The majorities in all groups view Sloan-C has having had an impact on

themselves, their institutions, higher education, and online learning in general. The grantees had the

highest majorities and non-grantee/for-profits the lowest majorities.

Table 12: What was the Impact of the Sloan Consortium!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Percentage Indicating Positive or Somewhat Positive Non-Grantees _______________|________________ | | Grantees All Non-Grantees Non-Profit For-Profit (Public or Private) (N=88) (N=108) (N=87) (N=21) For you 91.4 84.5 89.3 63.2

For your institution 82.8 76.4 79.5 63.2

For Higher Education 80.3 77.5 80.7 63.2

For the Growth of Online Learning 94.1 83.3 87.8 65.0

The non-grantees were also provided the opportunity to comment on the Sloan Foundation. For example:

"+!!

“The research done by Sloan [Consortium] in the area of online education has provided

credibility and is cited throughout various research studies across the industry.”

“The Sloan Foundation has been and needs to be a strong advocate for online learning.

The key is to provide the public with accurate information.”

“Our involvement w/Sloan [Consortium] is growing so my responses are reflective of where the

influence had been but see it getting stronger. Mostly value the reports generated from learning

surveys.”

“During Katrina, Sloan [Foundation] was instrumental in assisting the university. Also, various

online educators here use Sloan resources on a continuing basis.”

“I greatly value the Sloan Consortium and have been mostly involved via the workshops and

conferences. Keep leading the change online.”

“Funding the Sloan Consortium was a fantastic idea. Providing an organization where institutions

could discuss the best and latest practices of online education gave a boost to the dissemination

and respectability of the mode of teaching and learning.”

“Excellent resource [Sloan Consortium] - keep spreading word to small community and technical

colleges.”

“I hear it [Sloan-Consortium] mentioned a lot on NPR/PBS”

The sample above are fairly representative of the positive opinions and impressions even these non-

grantees had for Sloan Foundation and/or for Sloan-C. As indicated above, respondents meld their views

of the Foundation and the Consortium together. Also of interest is the fact that most of the comments

referred to Sloan-C.

#,!!

V. Qualitative Analysis

A mentioned above, the central purpose of this project was two-fold: first, to analyze the role of the

Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program in nurturing online learning enabling it to evolve into a major

vehicle for providing higher education opportunities to millions of students; and second, to examine the

historical record and to begin the process of documenting and preserving the stories of the individuals,

colleges, universities and organizations that were critical players in the Anytime, Anyplace Learning

Program.

To conduct the second aspect of the project, the database and other documents at the Alfred P. Sloan

Foundation were examined with the goal of determining the major grantees of the Anytime, Anyplace

Learning Program. As indicated earlier, 346 grants totaling $72,197,965 were awarded through this

program. However, forty-six grants totaling $40 million were awarded to twenty-two institutions. These

“major” grantees received grants of $500,000. or more over the life of the program . Twenty-seven

individuals (See Appendix C) from this population were interviewed or otherwise provided information

regarding the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program. Twenty-five individuals represented thirty-two of

the major grants and nineteen colleges or universities. (see Appendix D ). Two of these individuals

represented the Sloan Foundation. The individuals interviewed included administrators and faculty, all of

whom were involved in Sloan grant activities in their institutions. As a result of these interviews, certain

patterns evolved that might be helpful for understanding the success of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning

Program. It is important to note that the analysis of these interviews provides the perspective of grantees

outside of the Foundation which may or may not coincide with recollections and views of individuals in

the Foundation such as Ralph Gomory and Frank Mayadas.

The findings presented in this section are based on interviews conducted through 2010. The

interviewees were asked questions (see Appendix E) specifically related to their institution’s goals and

reasons for engaging in ALN and more importantly, whether these goals were realized. From these

interviews, several themes or “lessons learned” began to emerge.

A. The Value of Funding Large Public Universities

The number of grants awarded to large public universities (and in many cases entire university systems

(e.g., University of Illinois, State University of New York, City University of New York) provided a

mechanism for the Foundation’s funding to reach large numbers of faculty and students. The American

public universities have always seen access to higher education, a major focus of the Anytime, Anyplace

#"!!

Learning Program, as a fundamental aspect of their missions. The strategy of directing major grants to

these large systems was in keeping with the Foundation’s goal of providing an alternative for people who

wanted to pursue higher education but who could not easily attend regularly scheduled college classes.

Working with entire university systems was intended to move ALN into the mainstream of colleges and

universities; well beyond traditional distance, adult, and continuing education providers, early targets of

Foundation funding. The large public university systems such as SUNY and CUNY also included a

number of community colleges. The strategy of focusing on large public systems proved to be successful

mainly because it was these institutions including their community colleges that regarded access to a

higher education as central to their missions.

One important question was: would these large public institutions have moved into online learning

without the Sloan funding. Interviewees such as Meg Benke (SUNY Empire State College) indicated

that it would have been unlikely for the university-wide network (SUNY Learning Network - SLN) to

have developed without ALN funding from the Foundation. In her opinion, smaller pockets of ALN

development at different colleges of SUNY would have evolved but coordination and support, as

provided by Sloan Foundation funding, would have been lacking thereby slowing down ALN

development across the entire university system. Dr. Benke’s comments were echoed in various ways

by other interviewees. It is likely that many of the grantee institutions would either have not developed

their ALN programs, or would have done so much later and at a more moderate level without the

Foundation’s funding.

In discussing the focus on large public universities with Frank Mayadas, it became clear that the

Foundation’s early attempts to work with elite institutions such as M.I.T., Cornell, and Brown did not

yield tangible results with the exception of Stanford University and Johns Hopkins University. He

indicated also that support for university extension, adult, and continuing education programs did not

drive ALN into companion mainstream academic programs (examples include grants made to NYU and

UC Berkeley). So early on, he gained the conviction that if the ALN program was to succeed, it needed

to direct grant resources to academic programs at the large public university systems. These institutions

were an excellent fit for the ALN program, and most (e.g., SUNY Learning Network, Penn State World

Campus, UMASS Online Learning Network) formalized their grant programs into major university

operations involving traditional departments.

B. Large Institutional Grants Follow Smaller Grants

##!!

Interviewees reported that large grants typically followed smaller grants to individual faculty or

administrators at the system or college levels. A pattern emerged wherein individual faculty or

administrators within the university system received small or modest grants initially, with an opportunity

to demonstrate capability for establishing ALN projects at their institutions. When successful, they were

then encouraged to apply for larger grants. Examples of this approach were evident at the University of

Illinois (Burks Oakley), SUNY Learning Network (Eric Fredericksen), and University of Central Florida

(Joel Hartman and Charles Dziuban). Eric Fredericksen (formerly of the SUNY Learning Network and

now Associate Vice Provost at the University of Rochester) described a three-phase progression from

small proof of concept projects, to larger university-wide proof of scale projects, and finally to full

expansion and proof of sustainability projects. The smaller initial projects brought in "early-adopter"

faculty and administrators who then formed a "grassroots" base of individuals willing to support the

larger, system-wide effort. The larger system-wide efforts brought ALN to scale; and the grassroots base

that supported these efforts gave credence to the overall scaling-up of ALN, and avoided the appearance

and/or reality of top-down directives. Dr. Fredericksen also emphasized that the proposals submitted to

the Sloan Foundation focused on “doing or accomplishing something with tangible results” more so than

on study or research. Examples of funded projects typically involved designing ALN courses and

programs or developing a faculty support group. Frank Mayadas corroborated many of the comments

identified by Eric Fredericksen and felt that the major metric for all grants approved as part of the ALN

program was a focus on developing courses and programs that subsequently would build ALN

enrollments. Dr. Mayadas also mentioned that rarely were grants funded for the purpose of purchasing

hardware or software.

An interesting example of large grants following individual faculty grants occurred at the University

of Illinois at Springfield (UIS). Ray Schroeder, a faculty member, founded the Office of Technology-

Enhanced Learning in 1997 and initiated ALN with several small grants from the Foundation. In 2001,

working with Burks Oakley, the executive director of the University of Illinois of Illinois Online, he

developed a major grant of $500,000. to scale up ALN degree completion programs in the humanities and

sciences at UIS. In 2004, UIS received a second major grant ($1.2 million) from the Sloan Foundation to

expand further its ALN programs. However, a major controversy evolved when the faculty governing

body took exception to the fact that it was not consulted during the development of this grant. The issue

became serious enough that the provost had to leave his position in the wake of the controversy.

Regardless, the grant activities were carried out effectively under Ray Schroeder's leadership. Online

learning thrived at UIS, so much so, that today, more than half of the students there take at least one

online class each semester and more than one-quarter of its students are distant online students living in

#$!!

47 states and a dozen countries. As a result, UIS has become a model for many smaller comprehensive

public institutions that want to develop online learning programs.

In summary, the early small grants were a low risk way for the Foundation to identify exceptional

individuals such as Oakley, Fredericksen, Hartman and Schroeder who became key participants in driving

later, larger grants.

C. What Happens When the University Leadership Changes?

One major aspect of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program was the building of relationships between

individuals at colleges and universities and the Foundation. At the colleges, university leaders in online

education, such Gary Miller (Penn State), Jacquie Moloney (University of Massachusetts – Lowell),

Burks Oakley (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and Bob Ubell (New York University and

Stevens Institute of Technology) served as important catalysts and developed long-term relationships with

Sloan Foundation officers primarily with Frank Mayadas. These relationships were critically important

in moving ALN initiatives forward at their institutions. However, when there are changes in the

university online education leadership, as people move on to other institutions or retire, do grant

initiatives continue, end or do they evolve into something else? In the course of this investigation,

interviewees related several examples of situations where university leadership that changed in some

fundamental way could have impacted ALN development efforts. In some cases, changes in these key

personnel appear to have had little adverse effect on the development and growth of ALN programs. For

example, at the Penn State World Campus, Gary Miller and Jim Ryan, two of the early champions,

retired; at UMass, Jack Wilson and Jacquie Moloney moved up into positions of even greater

responsibility beyond strictly online learning; at SUNY, Eric Fredericksen, a very significant figure

during the early start of SUNY Learning Network, moved on to the University of Rochester. Yet there

was little adverse impact in student and program growth at Penn State, UMass Online, and SUNY. They

are all national leaders among larger state systems. There are exceptions. At the University of Illinois

system key changes at the top leadership levels, appear to have caused a serious detour.

The University of Illinois system had been one of the earliest (first grant received in 1995) and largest

recipients of grants from the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program. A system wide faculty development

and support facility was established at the Urbana-Champaign campus that allowed ALN to expand and

prosper within existing departments and academic units throughout the Illinois public university system.

The Champaign-Urbana campus was a pioneer and respected among the early ALN practitioners; the

Chicago campus, also received Sloan grants and it too is a strong participant' as is the Springfield campus

#%!!

referenced earlier. In 2005, a new president was named for the system following the retirement of Jim

Stukel. A signature initiative of the incoming president was the launch of a major online learning

initiative---- the Illinois Global Campus (IGC)---- that had as its goal the enrollment of 70,000 new

students by 2018 which would have made it the largest unit in the University of Illinois system. A

number of issues such as its planned for-profit nature, exclusive dependence on an adjunct faculty, lack of

integration with existing programs, and branding of the University of Illinois name, combined to doom

the IGC from the start. Frantic changes in particular aspects of the IGC concept did not save this project,

which came to an end in 2009. A loss of more than $7 million and a mere two hundred or so enrollments

resulted from this experiment. Several interviewees from the University of Illinois in this study who

commented on their experiences with the IGC, reported that they had questioned the concept from the

start, but they were unable to impact plans and implementation. A grant application for the IGC had been

submitted to the Sloan Foundation, but it was not approved. Personnel at the Foundation advised the new

president of the Illinois system that this would likely fail. In spite of a long-standing relationship with all

three campuses of the Illinois system in ALN matters and the Foundation's lack of enthusiasm for IGC,

this did not deter the new leadership from pushing forward towards an eventual, visible and embarrassing

failure. Frank Mayadas, the Program Director for the Foundation’s ALN Program, lamented that the

collapse of IGC damaged, unnecessarily, the reputations of the ALN programs at each of the Illinois

campuses. In substance, the IGC experiment was a set-back, and it diverted precious resources away from

campus ALN projects and into a dead-end. It caused some slow-down at the campuses, but in hindsight,

this set-back appears to have been temporary. The University of Illinois Springfield especially continues

its vigorous growth.

In general, it is concluded that the grant-making strategy by the Foundation was sufficiently robust so

as to be able to withstand key personnel losses along the way.

D. Building a Community

Interviewees were also asked questions (See Appendix F) about the Foundation's role in creating a

community of educators, support professionals and administrators involved in the practice and in studying

the new field of online learning. The importance of community-building was that it provided many

channels for the sharing of experiences, research, and best practices with colleagues from other

institutions. The Sloan Foundation funded a number of these channels directly related to community

building culminating in the formalization of the Sloan Consortium in 2008. A number of activities were

discussed (see Appendix F for types of channels) with the interviewees. There was almost unanimous

mention by the interviewees of the by-invitation only Summer Workshops funded by the Sloan

#&!!

Foundation. These workshops started at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign in 1999, then

were moved to Lake George, New York for three years and subsequently to other locales (Boston,

Victoria Island, Baltimore). The workshops in Urbana-Champaign and Lake George were mentioned as

being especially important in the early years as knowledge-sharing and community building activities for

cadres of educators experimenting with ALN. The intimacy of these workshops, where approximately

30-35 individuals would gather for three days was seen as incredibly beneficial to understanding and

moving ALN activities forward. While these Summer Workshops required modest Foundation support,

they were strikingly effective for practitioners to share knowledge and experiences, for planning of future

directions, and for developing ideas for joint research and projects. They were also early breeding

grounds for identifying individuals with expertise who could assist other colleges and universities

embarking on online learning programs. The Foundation as well as the Consortium developed informal

and later formal consultant referral services that relied on these individuals to share their experiences and

expertise. As an example, when the federal government launched its eArmy U project in 2001, a number

of consultants associated with the Consortium were involved with developing and evaluating the request

for proposals.

The Sloan Annual Conference (started in Philadelphia in 1995 as a small affair with approximately 90

attendees, mostly grantees), was also mentioned by many of the interviewees as an important venue for

knowledge-sharing and community building. While lacking the intimacy of the Summer Workshops, it

brought together a larger number of practitioners and scholars to share their knowledge about online

learning. In 2011, over 2,000 individuals attended this conference either in person (1,483) or virtually

(est. between 240-600) In sum, interviewees described a Sloan ALN community that started with a small

number of grantees, but grew as individuals and groups interested in various aspects of ALN emerged.

The advancement of online learning generated a good deal of new scholarly activity especially in

effectiveness and comparison studies. The faculty interviewees in particular referred to research as a

critical reason for their involvement with the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program. Chuck Dziuban

(University of Central Florida) specifically mentioned how a book project (Blended Learning: Research

Perspectives) and later a special edition of the Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks (JALN) had

helped forge relationships. The survey work of Jeff Seaman and Elaine Allen as well as research projects

resulting in publications that grew out of the Summer Workshops and the Blended Learning Workshops

in Chicago had a good deal of appeal to individuals interested in the study of online learning especially

with regard to administrative leadership and pedagogical practice. A blended learning group that spun off

in 2003 included a number of individuals who were not necessarily major grant recipients but were

#'!!

genuinely interested in the scholarship related to the implementation issues associated with blended

learning environments. This group continues to hold an annual workshop/conference each year. In

2012, approximately 900 individuals (469 in person and an estimated 200-450 virtually) attended the

Sloan Blended Learning Workshop/Conference. JALN was frequently mentioned as the most important

scholarly vehicle for disseminating knowledge about online learning and a number of interviewees

mentioned collaborative scholarly projects that culminated in JALN articles. Many individuals who

were not large grant recipients participated in these activities for the chance to share and collaborate on

research, experiences, and best practices. In many ways, it appears that the Summer Workshops

combined with the other activities mentioned above (ALN Conference, JALN, collaborative research

projects, the Blended Learning Workshop) were the seeds of the Sloan community.

In sum, the sub-program for community-building grants was unanimously acclaimed by interviewees

as an important element of the total Sloan program. It emphasized empirical research in the new field of

online education, and this in turn provided an outlet for faculty and administrators to gain scholarly

recognition, and for professional collaborations, which likely would never have occurred without the

availability of the Sloan community channels.

E. The Sloan Semester and Hurricanes Katrina and Rita

The community created under the Sloan grants, demonstrated a remarkable ability to coalesce into a team

with a common goal, in times of crisis. The Sloan ALN community had its most dramatic moment of

coming together in 2005 when hurricanes Katrina and Rita wreaked havoc and destruction on New

Orleans and parts of Mississippi. Several of the interviewees (Ray Schroeder, Bruce Chaloux, and Chuck

Dziuban) spoke passionately about the Sloan Foundation’s response in the aftermath of hurricanes

Katrina and Rita. Its response was the Sloan Semester for affected college students who abruptly saw their

education hopes literally wash away. Colleges and universities in the impacted areas closed, lost contact

with their students and in some cases did not reopen for a year or more. The collective effort of many

individuals and institutions, mainly affiliated with the Sloan Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program,

combined with special funding from the Foundation (approved in a matter of days) generated a solution

for thousands of displaced students. More than 3,000 students displaced by hurricanes Katrina and Rita,

enrolled in the Sloan Semester, a one-semester virtual university that offered a choice of 1,500 courses

from 150 institutions across the country---- online and free of charge to affected students. The generosity

of the Foundation and the agility with which this community moved to address this national catastrophe

was a defining moment that continues to permeate its sense of togetherness and community.

#(!!

F. The Sloan Consortium

The Sloan Consortium, has been the largest recipient of funding from the Anytime, Anyplace Learning

Program. While incorporated in 2008 as a 501c(3), the Consortium had existed as an informal

organization many years earlier and aspects of its operations such as publication of JALN, can be traced

back to 1996. From the beginning, a major focus of the Consortium was to promote quality in the

development and delivery of online learning which in its early years was viewed skeptically by many

segments of higher education. As an example, the Consortium’s Five Pillars of Quality Online Learning

was the first framework to develop goals, objectives and metrics for evaluating online programs. This

framework continues to be widely used and cited by a wide variety of practitioners and educaiton policy

makers.

In addition to issues of quality, the Consortium played a pivotal role in providing support for many of

the activities related to community building discussed earlier. The Sloan Consortium was able to

function well in this informal role because of the generous funding ($700,000 to $1 million per year for

the past ten years) provided by the Foundation as well as the involvement of individuals who became

national leaders in the field of ALN, many of whom have served on its Board of Directors. Because of

Foundation funding, the Sloan Consortium did not expend significant resources in marketing in its early

years. It did not have to since institutional and individual memberships were free. It could instead

concentrate on resources to nurture the evolving community of online education practitioners. Several

interviewees commented on the critical support structure that the Consortium provided in coordinating the

Summer Workshops, in publishing JALN, in coordinating collaborative research efforts by Jeff Seaman

and others, and by creating a “home” for the fledgling Sloan community. Interviewees were also quick

to comment that The Consortium’s finest hour might have been the role it played in coordinating the

Sloan Semester during hurricanes Katrina and Rita. In 2008, the Sloan Consortium applied for 501(c) (3)

status, as a step in response to the Foundation's strategy to bring down and then end, funding for the

Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program.

The potential of the Sloan Consortium as a professional organization capable of generating its own

funds through dues-paying membership and other revenue-generating activities is in part contingent on

learning from its past. It is important to keep in mind that the beginnings of a community preceded the

formal Consortium. Community-building activities such as the Summer Workshops and the Annual

Conferences evolved as much from grants made to individuals and colleges such as the University of

Illinois, State University of New York, and the University of Central Florida. Without a doubt, the

Consortium provided important services to facilitate these activities but much of the effort including

planning were performed as much by grant recipients and other individuals not directly connected to the

#*!!

Consortium. As an example, the Sloan Annual ALN Conference, a Sloan Consortium activity that

generates a significant profit, had a history of being organized, planned, and implemented by the

University of Central Florida in concert with a voluntary planning committee of Sloan Foundation

grantees. Some of the individuals (Gary Miller, Meg Benke, Jacquie Moloney, Karen Swan, Anthony

Picciano) involved with planning the conferences continued to serve and work for the Consortium in their

roles as members of the Board of Directors. However, as their terms of office expire, a new generation

of individuals will be needed to continue this work. The Consortium, in order to survive beyond the

period of Foundation funding which is due to end in 2013, needs to develop and expand more revenue-

generating activities such as the conference. The consortium is positioning itself to do this. For example,

all three of its major conferences (the Annual ALN Conference, the Blended Learning Workshop and the

Emerging Technologies Conference) have all seen significant increases in the number of registrants in

recent years and all are operating at a profit. Webinars and professional development workshops have

also grown in participation and have begun to generate a profit. However, more needs to be done for the

Consortium to survive. In the words of John Bourne, the Executive Director of the Consortium, “we are

not sure where it is all heading yet”.

#+!!

VI. Summary of Major Findings

In reviewing the previous sections, certain findings would benefit from further discussion. First, the

public sector of higher education was integral to the success of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program.

The vast majority of the grants awarded as part of this program went to large public university systems

including community colleges. This was not an accident but by design as confirmed by Frank Mayadas:

“In discussing the focus on large public universities with Frank Mayadas, it becomes clear that

the Foundation’s early attempts to work with elite institutions such as M.I.T., Cornell, and Brown

did not yield tangible results with the exception of Stanford University…So early on, he gained

the conviction that if the ALN program was to succeed, it needed to direct grant resources to

academic programs at the large public university systems. These institutions were an excellent fit

for the ALN program, and most (e.g., SUNY Learning Network, Penn State World Campus,

UMASS Online Learning Network) formalized their grant programs into major university

operations involving traditional departments.” (Frank Mayadas – November 1, 2010)

Public institutions represent approximately 76 percent of all student enrollments in American higher

education and many of them especially the community colleges focus on the importance of access to

higher education. The strategy of the Foundation to support the public sector enabled it to penetrate well

the largest segment of American higher education. Individuals from these institutions who received

grants credit the Foundation with making significant contributions to their programs and to development

of online learning in American higher education in general. Many of these individuals also became

leaders and provided examples to other public institutions to become active. In addition, many of the

individuals who were major grantees became active in building the online community that evolved into

the Sloan Consortium. All of the founding members of the Consortium’s Board of Directors came from

public institutions. While several of these individuals have retired or otherwise left the Board, the

majority (10 of 14) of the members on the Consortium’s Board of Directors today represent public

institutions.

Second, most individuals from institutions that have major online learning programs who were not

Anytime, Anyplace, Learning Program grantees (public, private non-profit, private for-profit) , are not

aware of the contribution of the Foundation. The awareness that does exist comes more from their

involvement with the Sloan Consortium. As the Consortium developed and evolved, it became an

attraction for a number of individuals and higher education institutions that had invested in online

$,!!

education. The Consortium’s annual reports, research publications (i.e. JALN, Allen & Seaman studies),

conferences, workshops and webinars have attracted many professionals active in online learning not just

Foundation grantees. JALN generates tens of thousands of downloads each year. Attendance at

Consortium conferences, workshops and webinars is in excess of 5,000 individuals per year. As a result,

whereas the Foundation seeded and gave life to the Consortium, the Consortium is now the vehicle that

provides exposure for the Foundation among the broader online learning providers.

Third, private for-profit colleges and universities never received any grant funding from the Anytime,

Anyplace Learning Program, however, they are an important and growing sector of online learning in

American higher education. While representing about 11 percent of all enrollments in American higher

education, they represent a large percentage (as much as 33 percent) of the total online population. Data

on this percentage are difficult to verify since some of these institutions do not participate in federal

financial aid programs and as a result, are not required to disclose enrollment information. They also do

not appear on major contact lists such as the IPEDS (Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System)

database maintained by the U.S. Department of Education that is used for conducting surveys and other

data collection activities. Their awareness of the Foundation’s contribution to online learning is modest at

best and somewhat lower than for other non-grantee institutions. And again, the awareness that does exist

comes from their association with the Sloan Consortium.

Fourth, the Sloan Consortium has made its presence known to the majority of all major online learning

providers regardless of whether they are public, private, non-profit or for-profit. It is likely that the

legacy of the Anytime, Anyplace Learning Program rests with the success of the Consortium. As the

largest recipient of funding from this program, it continues to provide a host of services to the online

learning community. Funding for the Consortium from the Foundation ends in 2013 and its future

remains to be seen. Most important metrics especially revenue and membership have indicated that the

Consortium continues to grow but there is no way of telling where it is on its growth cycle. Online

learning and blended learning will surely continue to grow and the need for the Consortium and the kinds

of services it provides will likewise grow.

While no one can predict the future, there is one aspect of online learning that virtually ensures its

continuing influence on the delivery of education at all levels. By virtue of its connection to digital

communications, online learning evolves as this technology evolves. The online learning that was

introduced to instructional programs in the 1990s and early 2000s is not the same today and will not be

the same five to seven years from now. Policies at the federal and state level are being scrutinized and

$"!!

amended to address and incorporate the inclusion of online learning. At the same time, educators and

policymakers around the world continue to work to meet the pedagogical challenges and opportunities

that online learning environments present. International educational collaborations which were modest

at best a few years ago are blossoming. This incredible mix of online technology and pedagogical

practice is reshaping instruction in our colleges and schools. The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation was at the

forefront of and served as a catalyst for this movement. It will continue to grow for years to come.

$#!!

Appendix A – Survey Sent to Grantees -.//0122113!

41567819!!!

:7;!<=>1!?11@!21516A1/!A7!B=0AC6CB=A1!C@!A<C2!2;0>1D!=2!=!B=2A!016CBC1@A!7E!=!F0=@A!E078!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@J2!.@DAC819!.@DB5=61!K1=0@C@F!G07F0=8)!L<C2!2A;/D!C2!E;@/1/!?D!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!=@/!67@/;6A1/!?D!0121=06<102!=A!MCAD!N@C>102CAD!7E!O1P!:70Q!=@/!R=?27@!M7551F12)!!.55!012B7@212!=01!<15/!C@!2A0C6A12A!67@EC/1@61!=@/!=A!@7!AC81!PC55!C@/C>C/;=5!012B7@212!?1!B;?5C2<1/)!!L<101!=01!@7!Q@7P@!0C2Q2!=2276C=A1/!PCA<!B=0AC6CB=AC7@9!7@5D!A<1!0121=06<102!PC55!<=>1!=66122!A7!A<1!/=A=9!P<C6<!PC55!?1!2A701/!=A!MCAD!N@C>102CAD!7E!O1P!:70Q!E70!=!8C@C8;8!7E!A<011!D1=02)!

SE!D7;!0161C>1/!8701!A<=@!7@1!F0=@A!E078!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@9!B51=21!67@2C/10!=55!2;6<!F0=@A2!C@!012B7@/C@F!A7!A<121!T;12AC7@2)!

U12B7@/1@A2!8=D!2QCB!=@D!T;12AC7@2!A<1D!PC2<)!!41!2C@61015D!A<=@Q!D7;!E70!D7;0!B=0AC6CB=AC7@)!!!

V0)!.@A<7@D!W)!GC66C=@79!MCAD!N@C>102CAD!7E!O1P!:70Q!!!V0)!X1EE!H1=8=@9!R=?27@!M7551F1!

!

!"#$%&'()$"*'+$,(*-$,.*-$,%*)"/()(,()$".*'"0*(12*34#%20*56*74$'"*8$,"0'()$"*9%'"(:/;*(1'(*<2%2*%2=2)>206*

!

4<=A!P=2!A<1!C@A1@/1/!267B1!7E!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!F0=@A!=6AC>CADY!ZM<16Q!=55!A<=A!=BB5D)[!

! G70AC7@!7E!=!26<775!Z/1B=0A81@A9!/C>C2C7@9!1A6)[!! \@AC01!6=8B;2!! ];5ACB51!6=8B;212!Z1)F)9!2D2A18!^PC/1[!! U1FC7@=5!70!@=AC7@=5)!!

4<=A!P=2!A<1!GUS].U:!267B1!7E!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!F0=@A!=6AC>CADY!

" G70AC7@!7E!=!26<775!Z/1B=0A81@A9!/C>C2C7@9!1A6)[!" \@AC01!6=8B;2!" ];5ACB51!6=8B;212!Z1)F)9!2D2A18!^PC/1[!" U1FC7@=5!70!@=AC7@=5)!!

4<=A!P=2!A<1!B0C8=0D!E76;2!7E!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!F0=@A!=6AC>CADY!

" G077E!7E!67@61BA!^!@1P!B07F0=8!70!=6AC>CAD!_!A7!2<7P!A<=A!=!B=0AC6;5=0!=BB07=6<!P=2!>C=?51)!" R1FC@!B07F0=8!70!=6AC>CAD!^!B077E!7E!67@61BA!=501=/D!678B51A1!70!@7A!01T;C01/)!" W07P!=@!1`C2AC@F!=BB07=6<!=@/a70!B07F0=8)!" bA<10!ZB51=21!1`B5=C@[c!dddddddddddddddddddd!!

$$!!

e7P!P7;5/!D7;!0=A1!A<1!2;66122!7E!A<1!F0=@A!=6AC>CADc!

" O7A!2;66122E;59!P1!/C/!@7A!=6<C1>1!P<=A!P1!<=/!<7B1/!E70)!" H781P<=A!2;66122E;59!P1!=6<C1>1/!2781a872A!7E!P<=A!P1!<7B1/!E70)!" H;66122E;59!P1!=6<C1>1/!=55!7E!P<=A!P1!<7B1/!E70)!" f10D!2;66122E;59!P1!=6<C1>1/!2;66122!?1D7@/!P<=A!A<1!F0=@A!B07B72=5!<=/!1@>C2C7@1/)!!

SE!D7;!<=/!CA!=55!A7!/7!7>10!=F=C@9!P<=A!6<=@F12!ZCE!=@D[!P7;5/!D7;!8=Q1!=@/!P<DY!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

!

! !

$%!!

!&?'=(*$#*(12*34#%20*56*74$'"*9%'"(*'=()>)(-*$"*-$,%*)"/()(,()$"6*

e7P!5CQ15D!P=2!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!A7!B;02;1!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!CE!CA!<=/!@7A!0161C>1/!F0=@A!E;@/C@F!E078!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!E7;@/=AC7@Y!

" f10D!N@5CQ15D!" N@5CQ15D!" H781P<=A!N@5CQ15D!" N@/16C/1/!" H781P<=A!KCQ15D!" KCQ15D!" f10D!KCQ15D!!

4<=A!P101!A<1!F1@10=5!=AACA;/12!A7!A<1!F0=@A!=6AC>CAD!E078!PCA<C@!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@Y!

! .@A=F7@C2AC6! O1;A0=5! H781P<=A!2;BB70AC>1!

f10D!2;BB70AC>1!

V712!@7A!=BB5D!

V;0C@F!A<1!B07B72=5!B5=@@C@F!=@/!2;?8C22C7@!B076122! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

V;0C@F!A<1!F0=@A!=6AC>CAD! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

.EA10!A<1!678B51AC7@!7E!A<1!F0=@A! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !!

!

4<=A!0751!/7!D7;!?15C1>1!A<=A!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@_E;@/1/!=6AC>CAD!<=/!7@!A<1!E7557PC@F!=A!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@Y!

! .!@1F=AC>1!C8B=6A!

O7!C8B=6A! H8=55!B72CAC>1!C8B=6A!

K=0F1!B72CAC>1!C8B=6A!

V712!@7A!=BB5D!

.AACA;/12!7E!=/8C@C2A0=A702!A7P=0/2!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

.AACA;/12!7E!E=6;5AD!A7P=0/2!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

G07F0122!7E!8D!C@2ACA;AC7@!C@!18?0=6C@F!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

!

!

$&!!

e7P!C8B70A=@A!P101!1=6<!7E!A<1!E7557PC@F!=2!?=00C102!A7!A<1!B07g16A!=A!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@Y!

! O7A!=A!=55!C8B70A=@Aa@7!

C8B=6A!

KCAA51!C8B70A=@61!

H781P<=A!C8B70A=@A!

f10D!S8B70A=@A!

M0CAC6=5!?=00C10!

]=A6<!7E!B07g16A!/C016AC7@!A7!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@J2!=6=/18C6!F7=52! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

.>=C5=?C5CAD!7E!C@2ACA;AC7@_?=21/!0127;0612! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

S@2ACA;AC7@=5!2Q1BAC6C28!A7P=0/2!7@5C@1!1/;6=AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

S@2;EEC6C1@A!E;@/C@F!B07>C/1/!C@!F0=@A! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

b@5C@1!1/;6=AC7@!@7A!=661BA1/!?D!E=6;5AD! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

K=6Q!7E!C@2A0;6AC7@=5!2;BB70A!B1027@@15! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

HA;/1@A2!=B=A<D!A7!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

S@2ACA;AC7@!<=2!87>1/!=P=D!E078!E;55D!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!A7!?51@/1/!=@/!P1?_

1@<=@61/!51=0@C@F!" ! " ! " ! " ! " !

I1/10=59!2A=A1!70!7A<10!B75C6C12!A<=A!5C8CA1/!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!C@!7;0!21AAC@F! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

M75516AC>1!?=0F=C@C@F!=@/a70!;@C7@!C22;12! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !!

!

4<=A!/7!D7;!?15C1>1!P=2!A<1!872A!60CAC6=5!?=00C10!A<=A!D7;!E=61/Y!

!

4<=A!51>15!7E!C8B=6A!/C/!D7;0!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!F0=@A!=6AC>CAD!<=>1!7@Y!

! .!@1F=AC>1!C8B=6A!

O7!C8B=6A! H8=55!B72CAC>1!C8B=6A!

K=0F1!B72CAC>1!C8B=6A!

V712!@7A!=BB5D!

L<1!2;66122!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!=A!8D!C@2ACA;AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

L<1!F07PA<!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!C@!F1@10=5! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

L<1!7>10=55!P155_?1C@F!7E!8D!C@2ACA;AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !!

!

* *

$'!!

!&?'=(*$#*(12*34#%20*56*74$'"*9%'"(*'=()>)(-*$"*$(12%*)"/()(,()$"/6*

!

S@!P<=A!P=D2!ZCE!=@D[!/C/!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@_E;@/1/!=6AC>CAC12!=A!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!C8B=6A!!7A<10!C@2ACA;AC7@2!?1D7@/!D7;0!7P@)!!G51=21!6<16Q!=55!A<=A!=BB5D)!

! S@E708=5!/C26;22C7@!PCA<!B1102!E078!7A<10!C@2ACA;AC7@2!! G0121@A=AC7@!=A!67@E101@61Z2[!! G0121@A1/!C@!=6=/18C6!g7;0@=5!=0AC651Z2[!! M7>10=F1!C@!576=5!B0122!! M7>10=F1!C@!01FC7@=5!B0122!! M7>10=F1!C@!@=AC7@=5!B0122!! HCA1!>C2CA!?D!818?102!7E!7A<10!C@2ACA;AC7@2!! S@>CA1/!A7!B0121@A!=A!7A<10!C@2ACA;AC7@Z2[!! bA<10!dddddddddddddddddddd!!

S@!P<=A!P=D2!ZCE!=@D[!/7!D7;!?15C1>1!A<=A!A<1!7>10=55!=6AC>CAC12!7E!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!Z@7A!g;2A!A<721!=A!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@[!C8B=6A1/!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!C@!.810C6=@!<CF<10!1/;6=AC7@Y!!G51=21!6<16Q!=55!A<=A!=BB5D)!

! R;C5A!=!6788;@CAD!E70!?7A<!E708=5!=@/!C@E708=5!/C26;22C7@!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!C22;12!! \2A=?5C2<1/!8=g70!>1@;12!Z1)F)9!67@E101@6129!P70Q2<7B2[!E76;21/!7@!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!! I;@/1/!=@/!C@CAC=A1/!8=g70!0121=06<!B07g16A2!E70!!2A;/DC@F!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!! G07>C/1/!B;?5C6=AC7@!>1@;12!E70!/C2218C@=AC@F!26<75=02<CB!Z1)F)9!2A;/C129!?12A!B0=6AC612[!C@!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F)!! \2A=?5C2<1/!T;=5CAD!2A=@/=0/2!=@/!E0=81P70Q2!E70!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!! G07>C/1/!B;?5C6!=P=01@122!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!C@!A<1!@1P2!81/C=!Z576=59!01FC7@=59!@=AC7@=5!! G07>C/1/!B0C@A!=@/!P1?_?=21/!C@E708=AC7@!0127;0612!7@!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!! G07>C/1/!276C=5!@1AP70QC@F!0127;0612!E70!A<1!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!6788;@CAD!! ]=/1!67@2;5AC@F!=@/!7A<10!1`B10AC21!=>=C5=?51!A7!C@2ACA;AC7@2!C@CAC=AC@F!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!=6AC>CAC12!! bA<10!dddddddddddddddddddd!!

!

$(!!

@'%92%*'='02&)=*=$&&,")(-*$#*/=1$4'%/*'"0*?%'=()()$"2%/*$#*$"4)"2*42'%")"96*

4<=A!0751!ZCE!=@D[!/C/!1=6<!7E!A<1!E7557PC@F!B5=D!E70!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@h2!1EE70A2!PCA<!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!ZC@65;/C@F!=55!=2B16A29!@7A!g;2A!A<721!E;@/1/!?D!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@[Y!

! O7!0751! H8=55!C8B=6A!

]7/10=A1!C8B=6A!

K=0F1!C8B=6A!

.810C6=@!VC2A=@61!\/;6=AC7@!M7@270AC;8!Z.V\M[! " ! " ! " ! " !

.810C6=@!H76C1AD!E70!L0=C@C@F!=@/!V1>157B81@A!Z.HLV[! " ! " ! " ! " !

.2276C=AC7@!E70!\/;6=AC7@=5!M788;@C6=AC7@2!=@/!L16<@757FD!Z.\ML[! " ! " ! " ! " !

.2276C=AC7@!E70!A<1!./>=@61!7E!M78B;AC@F!C@!\/;6=AC7@!Z..M\[! " ! " ! " ! " !

M7;@6C5!E70!./;5A!=@/!M7@AC@;C@F!\/;6=AC7@!ZM.\K[! " ! " ! " ! " !

\VNM.NH\! " ! " ! " ! " !

1K1=0@C@F!W;C5/! " ! " ! " ! " !

\;07B1=@!VC2A=@61!\/;6=AC7@!O1AP70Q!Z\V\O[! " ! " ! " ! " !

S@A10@=AC7@=5!H76C1AD!7E!L16<@757FD!C@!\/;6=AC7@!ZSHL\[! " ! " ! " ! " !

G1@@!HA=A1!.810C6=@!M1@A10!E70!A<1!HA;/D!7E!VC2A=@61!\/;6=AC7@!Z.MHV\[! " ! " ! " ! " !

H57=@!M7@270AC;8!ZH57=@_M[! " ! " ! " ! " !

N@CA1/!HA=A12!VC2A=@61!K1=0@C@F!.2276C=AC7@!ZNHVK.[! " ! " ! " ! " !

412A10@!M77B10=AC>1!E70!\/;6=AC7@=5!L16<@757FC12!Z4M\L[! " ! " ! " ! " !

412A10@!S@A102A=A1!M788C22C7@!E70!eCF<10!\/;6=AC7@!Z4SMe\[! " ! " ! " ! " !!

!

4<=A!51>15!7E!C@>75>181@A!P=2!A<101!E70!D7;!=@/!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!PCA<!A<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!ZH57=@_M[Y!

! O7@1! KCAA51! H781! M7@2C/10=?51!

:7;! " ! " ! " ! " !

:7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " !!

!

$*!!

4<=A!P=2!A<1!C8B=6A!ZCE!=@D[!7E!A<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!ZH57=@_M[Y!

! O1F=AC>1! O1;A0=5aO7@1! H781P<=A!B72CAC>1!

G72CAC>1! O.a!V712!@7A!=BB5D!

I70!D7;! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

I70!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

I70!eCF<10!\/;6=AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

I70!A<1!F07PA<!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !!

!

4<=A!C8B=6A!ZCE!=@D[!/C/!1=6<!7E!A<1!E7557PC@F!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!=6AC>CAC12!<=>1!7@!D7;!=@/a70!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@Y!

! O7!0751! H8=55!C8B=6A! ]7/10=A1!C8B=6A!

K=0F1!C8B=6A!

U1F;5=0!18=C5!@1P251AA102!ZH57=@_M!fC1P9!H57=@_M!O7P[! " ! " ! " ! " !

G07E122C7@=5!U15=AC7@2<CB2!=@/!M755=?70=AC7@2! " ! " ! " ! " !

M7@E101@612aHD8B72C=a470Q2<7B2!Zb05=@/79!H=@!I0=@6C2679!M<C6=F7[! " ! " ! " ! " !

X7;0@=5!ZX.KO[! " ! " ! " ! " !

b@5C@1!41?C@=02! " ! " ! " ! " !

.@@;=5!b@5C@1!K1=0@C@F!2;0>1D2! " ! " ! " ! " !

S@>CA=AC7@!b@5D!H;8810!470Q2<7B2! " ! " ! " ! " !!

G51=21!51A!Q@7P!=@D!7A<10!A<7;F<A2!D7;!8=D!<=>1!015=A1/!A7!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!E7;@/=AC7@!=@/!CA2!0751!C@!B0787AC@F!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F)!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

$+!!

Appendix B – Survey Sent to Non-Grantees

-=//0122113!

:7;!<=>1!?11@!21516A1/!A7!B=0AC6CB=A1!C@!A<C2!2;0>1D!?16=;21!D7;!=@/!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!=01!51=/102!C@!A<1!P705/!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!C@!<CF<10!1/;6=AC7@)!!!41!=01!67@/;6AC@F!A<C2!2<70A9!1CF<A_8C@;A1!2;0>1D!=2!B=0A!7E!A<1!1>=5;=AC7@!7E!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@J2!!"#$%&'()!"#*+,-').',/"%"0!F0=@A!B07F0=8)!!L<C2!B07F0=8!P<C6<!P=2!=/8C@C2A101/!E078!"++$!A<07;F<!#,",9!!E;@/1/!7>10!A<011!<;@/01/!B07g16A2!A7A=5C@F!=5872A!i*,!8C55C7@!E70!A<1!/1>157B81@A!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!B07F0=82!=@/!67;0212)!!L<1!B;0B721!7E!A<C2!2;0>1D!C2!A7!/1A108C@1!A<1!C8B=6A!7E!A<C2!F0=@A!B07F0=8!7@!A<1!/1>157B81@A!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!C@!.810C6=@!<CF<10!1/;6=AC7@)!!!!.55!/=A=!675516A1/!E078!A<C2!2;0>1D!PC55!7@5D!?1!;21/!C@!=FF01F=A1!E708!=@/!A<101!PC55!?1!=?275;A15D!@7!/C26572;01!7E!C@/C>C/;=52!P<7!012B7@/)!!!

SE!D7;!<=>1!=@D!T;12AC7@29!E115!E011!A7!67@A=6A!81!=A!D7;0!67@>1@C1@61)!

41!2C@61015D!A<=@Q!D7;!E70!D7;0!B=0AC6CB=AC7@)!!!

V0)!.@A<7@D!W)!GC66C=@7!!

*

j;12AC7@!"c!G51=21!>10CED!A<=A!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!7EE102!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!B07F0=82!=@/a70!67;0212)!

oo :12!

oo O7!j;12AC7@!#c!.01!D7;!E=8C5C=0!PCA<!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@J2!!"#$%&'()!"#*+,-').',/"%"0)1/20/,&Y!

oo :12!oo O7!

j;12AC7@!$c!e=>1!D7;!70!<=2!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!1>10!=BB5C1/!E70!70!0161C>1/!=!F0=@A!E078!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@J2!!"#$%&'()!"#*+,-')1/20/,&Y!

oo b;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!<=2!0161C>1/!=!F0=@A!E078!A<1!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!E70!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F)!

oo b;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!<=2!@1>10!0161C>1/!=!F0=@A!E078!A<1!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!E70!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F)!

oo b;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!=BB5C1/!E70!=!F0=@A!E078!A<1!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!?;A!P=2!@7A!E;@/1/)!

oo S!0161C>1/!=!F0=@A!E078!A<1!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!P<C51!S!P=2!18B57D1/!=A!=@7A<10!C@2ACA;AC7@)!!

!

!

!

!

%,!!

!

j;12AC7@!%=c!!!S@!D7;0!7BC@C7@9!P<=A!51>15!7E!C8B=6A!/C/!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@J2!!"#$%&'()!"#*+,-').',/"%"0)1/20/,&!<=>1!7@Y!

" ! " .!@1F=AC>1!C8B=6A!

" O7!C8B=6A!

" H8=55!B72CAC>1!C8B=6A!

" K=0F1!B72CAC>1!C8B=6A!

" V7@JA!Q@7P!

L<1!2;66122!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!=A!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

L<1!F07PA<!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!C@!F1@10=5!C@!.810C6=@!<CF<10!1/;6=AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

!

j;12AC7@!%?c!SE!D7;!C@/C6=A1/!A<=A!A<1!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!<=/!=@!C8B=6A!7@!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!70!C@!<CF<10!1/;6=AC7@!C@!F1@10=59!B51=21!1`B5=C@!324!C@!D7;0!7P@!P70/2!C@!A<1!2B=61!B07>C/1/!?157P)!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

%"!!

!

j;12AC7@!&c!!b@1!7E!A<1!8=g70!B07g16A2!7E!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@J2!!"#$%&'()!"#*+,-').',/"%"0)1/20/,&!P=2!A7!12A=?5C2<!A<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!7E!M7551F12!=@/!N@C>102CAC12!ZH57=@_M[9!=@!70F=@Ck=AC7@!7E!B07E122C7@=52!=@/!C@2ACA;AC7@2!/1/C6=A1/!A7!B0787AC@F!T;=5CAD!C@!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F)!.01!D7;!=A!=55!E=8C5C=0!PCA<!H57=@_MY!

oo :12!oo O7!!

!

j;12AC7@c!'c!e=>1!D7;!70!<=2!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!1>10!?11@!=!818?10!7E!H57=@_MY!

oo :12!oo O7!

!j;12AC7@!(c!!4<=A!0751!ZCE!=@D[!/C/!1=6<!7E!A<1!E7557PC@F!70F=@Ck=AC7@2!B5=D!E70!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@h2!1EE70A2!PCA<!7@5C@1!51=0@C@FY!

" ! " O7!0751!

" H8=55!C8B=6A!

" ]7/10=A1!C8B=6A!

" K=0F1!C8B=6A!

.810C6=@!VC2A=@61!\/;6=AC7@!M7@270AC;8!Z.V\M[! " ! " ! " ! " !

.810C6=@!H76C1AD!E70!L0=C@C@F!=@/!V1>157B81@A!Z.HLV[! " ! " ! " ! " !

.2276C=AC7@!E70!\/;6=AC7@=5!M788;@C6=AC7@2!=@/!L16<@757FD!Z.\ML[! " ! " ! " ! " !

.2276C=AC7@!E70!A<1!./>=@61!7E!M78B;AC@F!C@!\/;6=AC7@!Z..M\[! " ! " ! " ! " !

M7;@6C5!E70!./;5A!=@/!M7@AC@;C@F!\/;6=AC7@!ZM.\K[! " ! " ! " ! " !

\VNM.NH\! " ! " ! " ! " !

1K1=0@C@F!W;C5/! " ! " ! " ! " !

\;07B1=@!VC2A=@61!\/;6=AC7@!O1AP70Q!Z\V\O[! " ! " ! " ! " !

S@A10@=AC7@=5!H76C1AD!7E!L16<@757FD!C@!\/;6=AC7@!ZSHL\[! " ! " ! " ! " !

G1@@!HA=A1!.810C6=@!M1@A10!E70!A<1!HA;/D!7E!VC2A=@61!\/;6=AC7@!Z.MHV\[! " ! " ! " ! " !

H57=@!M7@270AC;8!ZH57=@_M[! " ! " ! " ! " !

N@CA1/!HA=A12!VC2A=@61!K1=0@C@F!.2276C=AC7@!ZNHVK.[! " ! " ! " ! " !

412A10@!M77B10=AC>1!E70!\/;6=AC7@=5!L16<@757FC12!Z4M\L[! " ! " ! " ! " !

412A10@!S@A102A=A1!M788C22C7@!E70!eCF<10!\/;6=AC7@!Z4SMe\[! " ! " ! " ! " !

!

!

%#!!

j;12AC7@!*c!!G51=21!81=2;01!A<1!51>15!7E!C@>75>181@A!7E!A<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!7@!D7;!70!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@Y!

" ! " O7@1! " KCAA51! " H781! " M7@2C/10=?51!

:7;! " ! " ! " ! " !

:7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " !!

!

j;12AC7@!+c!4<=A!P=2!A<1!C8B=6A!ZCE!=@D[!7E!A<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!ZH57=@_M[Y!

" ! " O1F=AC>1!

" O1;A0=5aO7@1!

" H781P<=A!B72CAC>1!

" G72CAC>1! " O.a!V712!@7A!=BB5D!

I70!D7;! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

I70!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

I70!eCF<10!\/;6=AC7@! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

I70!A<1!F07PA<!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F!C@!F1@10=5! " ! " ! " ! " ! " !

!

!

j;12AC7@!",c!4<=A!C8B=6A!ZCE!=@D[!/C/!1=6<!7E!A<1!E7557PC@F!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!=6AC>CAC12!<=>1!7@!D7;!=@/a70!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@Y!

" ! " O7!0751! " H8=55!C8B=6A!

" ]7/10=A1!C8B=6A!

" K=0F1!C8B=6A!

X7;0@=5!7E!.2D@6<07@7;2!K1=0@C@F!O1AP70Q2!ZX.KO[! " ! " ! " ! " !

M7@E101@612aHD8B72C=a470Q2<7B2!Zb05=@/79!H=@!I0=@6C2679!M<C6=F7[! " ! " ! " ! " !

b@5C@1!41?C@=02! " ! " ! " ! " !

.@@;=5!b@5C@1!K1=0@C@F!2;0>1D2! " ! " ! " ! " !

S@>CA=AC7@!b@5D!H;8810!470Q2<7B2! " ! " ! " ! " !!

G51=21!2<=01!=@D!7A<10!A<7;F<A2!D7;!8=D!<=>1!015=A1/!A7!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!=@/!CA2!0751!C@!B0787AC@F!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F)!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd!

**

%$!!

3??2"0)A*B*!"(2%>)2<22*@)/(**

!S@A10>C1P11! M;001@A!S@2ACA;AC7@=5!.EEC5C=AC7@! HA;/D!.6AC>CAD!

! ! !R1@Q19!]1F! \8BC01!HA=A1!M7551F1! S@A10>C1P!RC2<7B9!L=@=! 4C@6<12A10!N@C>102CAD! G=B10!S@A10>C1P!R7;0@19!X7<@! R=?27@ab5C@!M7551F1!_!H57=@!M! S@A10>C1P!M=0@1>=519!M=075! \8BC01!HA=A1!M7551F1! S@A10>C1P!M<=57;`9!R0;61! HU\R! S@A10>C1P!VkC;?=@9!M<=0512! N!7E!M1@A0=5!I570C/=! S@A10>C1P!I01/10C6Q21@9!\0C6!! N!7E!U76<12A10! G=B10!S@A10>C1P!e=0A8=@9!X715!! N!7E!M1@A0=5!I570C/=! S@A10>C1P!eC257B9!W01F!! V01`15!N! G=B10!S@A10>C1P!X=EE19!V=>C/! N!7E!O70A<10@!I570C/=! G=B10!S@A10>C1P!]C55109!W=0D! G1@@!HA=A1! G=B10!S@A10>C1P!]757@1D9!X=6T;C1! N!]=22!K7P155! HA=A181@A!_!fC/17!]7@=679!H=5! 412A10@!W7>10@702!N! V76;81@A=AC7@!OC18C169!OC18C16! N!7E!S55C@7C2!M<C6=F7! S@A10>C1P!b=Q51D9!R;0Q2! N!7E!S55C@7C2!N0?=@=!M<=8B=CF@! S@A10>C1P!bAA19!W170F1!! MCAD!N@C>102CAD!7E!O1P!:70Q! S@A10>C1P!GC66C=@79!.@A<7@D! MCAD!N@C>102CAD!7E!O1P!:70Q! S@A10>C1P!GC6Q1AA9!.51`=@/0=!! HNO:!K1=0@C@F!O1AP70Q! S@A10>C1P!U=F=@9!K=00D! G1@@!HA=A1! S@A10>C1P!H6<071/109!U=D! N!7E!S55C@7C2!HB0C@FEC15/! S@A10>C1P!H1=8=@9!!X1EE! R=?27@ab5C@!M7551F1!_!H57=@!M! G=B10!S@A10>C1P!HP=@9!l=01@! l1@A!HA=A1!N@C>102CAD! S@A10>C1P!LC@F9!\>15D@! W170FC=!G10C81A10!M7551F1! S@A10>C1P!N?1559!R7?! O1P!:70Q!N@C>102CAD! S@A10>C1P!fCF@=019!l=01@! ]C6<CF=@!HA=A1!N! G=B10!S@A10>C1P!

! ! !W7870D9!U=5B<! H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@! S@A10>C1P!]=D=/=29!I0=@Q! H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@! S@A10>C1P!

%%!!

3??2"0)A*C*D*B1'%'=(2%)/()=/*$#*E'F$%*!"(2%>)2<22/GH%'"(*I2=)?)2"(*!"/()(,()$"/* Public/Privatea: 12 Public Institutions 7 Private Institutions Regiona: 11 East; 1 South; 3 Midwest; 4 West Sizea b: 4 Small; 3 Medium; 12 Large *

=) U1B0121@A!A<1!"+!M7551F12aN@C>102CAC12!?) V1EC@CAC7@2!7E!H8=55!-!&9,,,!2A;/1@A2m!!]1/C;8!&9,,,!A7!",9,,,!2A;/1@A2m!K=0F1!3!",9,,,!2A;/1@A2)!

!

%&!!

3??2"0)A*J*!"(2%>)2<*K,2/()$"/*#$%*H%'"(*I2=)?)2"(/**

56 G51=21!?0C1E5D!/1260C?1!A<1!@=A;01!7E!A<1!F0=@A!B07g16A!=A!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!E;@/1/!?D!A<1!H57=@!

I7;@/=AC7@!=2!B=0A!7E!A<1!!"#$%&'()!"#*+,-').',/"%"0)1/20/,&6)!!

#) 4<=A!P101!D7;0!70!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@J2!2B16CEC6!F7=52!E70!1@F=FC@F!C@!.KOY!!!!

$) 4101!D7;0!F7=52!/C016A1/!8701!E70!7EE_6=8B;29!7@_6=8B;2!70!?7A<!ADB12!7E!2A;/1@A2Y!!!!

%) 4<=A!0751!/C/!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!E;@/C@F!B5=D!C@!<15BC@F!D7;!70!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!01=5Ck1!CA2!F7=52!01F=0/C@F!51=0@C@F!=@/!.KOY!!!!

&) 47;5/!D7;!<=>1!87>1/!=<1=/!PCA<!D7;0!F7=52!01F=0/5122!7E!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!E;@/C@FY!!SE!D129!P<1@Y!!ZPCA<C@!=!D1=09!AP7!D1=029!EC>1!D1=029!1A6)[!!!!

') 4<=A!P=2!A<1!872A!C8B70A=@A!=2B16A!7E!A<1!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!015=AC7@2<CBY!!!!

() S@!577QC@F!=A!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@!A7/=D!Z#,,+[9!<=2!.KO!B07F01221/!=2!8;6<!=2!D7;!1@>C2C7@1/!P<1@!D7;!EC02A!0161C>1/!H57=@!I;@/C@FY!!SE!D129!1`B5=C@aB07>C/1!E;0A<10!/1A=C52!Z@;8?10!7E!B07F0=829!67;0212!/1>157B1/Y!!I=6;5AD!A1=6<C@F!>C=!.KOY!!HA;/1@A2!1@07551/!C@!.KOY!!!

*) S@!577QC@F!=A!<CF<10!1/;6=AC7@!C@!F1@10=5c!!<=2!.KO!B07F01221/!=2!8;6<!=2!D7;!P7;5/!<=>1!1@>C2C7@1/!P<1@!D7;!EC02A!0161C>1/!H57=@!I;@/C@FY!!4<=A!/7!D7;!?=21!D7;0!C8B0122C7@!7@Y!!!!

+) V7!D7;!<=>1!=@D!67881@A!A<=A!B07>C/12!2781!C8B70A=@A!C@2CF<Aa2A70D!C@A7!A<1!C8B70A=@61!7E!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@J2!E;@/C@F!7E!D7;0!.KO!G07F0=8Y!!

!

*

*

%'!!

3??2"0)A*8*

!"(2%>)2<*K,2/()$"/*#$%*B$&&,")(-*L,)40)"9**

!

") e=>1!D7;!<=/!=@D!015=AC7@2<CB!PCA<!A<1!.5E01/!G)!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@!70!L<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!@7A!/C016A5D!015=A1/!A7!F0=@A28=@2<CBY!

!!#) e=>1!D7;!B=0AC6CB=A1/!C@!=@D!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!=6AC>CAC12!Z1)F)9!67@E101@6129!P70Q2<7B29!

B;?5C6=AC7@29!0121=06<[Y!!!$) V7!D7;!67@2C/10!D7;0215E!=6AC>15D!C@>75>1/!C@!A<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8Y!!!%) e7P!C8B70A=@A!<=2!D7;0!C@>75>181@A!PCA<!A<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!?11@!A7!D7;0!C@2ACA;AC7@Y!

G07>C/1!67@601A1!1`=8B512)!!!&) e7P!C8B70A=@A!/7!D7;!A<C@Q!A<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8!<=2!?11@!C@!87>C@F!E70P=0/!7@5C@1!

51=0@C@F!C@!.810C6=@!<CF<10!1/;6=AC7@Y!!!G07>C/1!1`=8B512)!!') R157P!=01!=!5C2A!7E!=6AC>CAC12!7E!A<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8)!!G51=21!0=@Q!A<1!E7557PC@F!E078!"!A7!*c!

!U=@Q!!!!.6AC>CADa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!e=>1!N21/aG=0AC6CB=A1/!!ddd!!!!!!]18?102<CB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ddddddddd!ddd!!!!!!G07E122C7@=5!U15=AC7@2<CB2!=@/!M755=?70=AC7@2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ddddddddd!

!!!!!!!ddd!!!!!!M7@E101@612aHD8B72C=a470Q2<7B2Zb05=@/79!H=@!I0=@6C2679!M<C6=F7[!!!!!!!ddddddddd!!!!!!!!ddd!!!!!!G;?5C6=AC7@2!ZX.KO9!H57=@!fC1P9!R77Q2[!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ddddddddd!!!!!!!!ddd!!!!!!b@5C@1!41?C@=02!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ddddddddd!!!!!!!!ddd!!!!!!U121=06<!Z.551@!n!H1=8=@!HA;/C12[!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ddddddddd!!!!!!!!ddd!!!!!!S@>CA=AC7@!b@5D!H;8810!470Q2<7B2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ddddddddd!!!!!!!!ddd!!!!!!bA<10dddddddddddddddddddddddddd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ddddddddd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!

() V7!D7;!<=>1!=@D!67881@A!A<=A!B07>C/12!2781!C8B70A=@A!C@2CF<Aa2A70D!C@A7!A<1!C8B70A=@61!7E!H57=@!I7;@/=AC7@J2!1EE70A2!=A!?;C5/C@F!=!6788;@CAD!7E!26<75=02!=@/!B0=6ACAC7@102!7E!7@5C@1!51=0@C@F)!!

*) 4<=A!/7!D7;!211!=2!A<1!H57=@!M7@270AC;8J2!0751!E70!A<1!E;A;01!7E!.810C6=@!7@5C@1!51=0@C@FY!! !

%(!!

References Allen, I. E. & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. 2013. http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/changing_course_2012 Accessed January 10, 2013. Kolowich, S. (September, 2009). What doomed Global Campus?. Inside Education. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/09/03/globalcampus Accessed: January 15, 2010. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (1997). Distance education in higher education institutions, NCES 97-062. Washington, D.C.